BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

Bill[_12_]

justan wrote:
Keyser Söze Wrote in message:r
On 2/24/21 3:52 PM, wrote: On Wed, 24 Feb 2021
11:57:38 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On
2/24/21 10:22 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/22/2021 7:54 PM, Wayne B
wrote: On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 19:08:43 -0500,
wrote: On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 10:08:12 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote: On 2/22/21 9:58 AM,
wrote: On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 09:13:56 -0500,
Keyser Söze
wrote: Good luck and don't forget your parachute.
Sheesh. Since Boeing doesn't make engines and the Pratt
and Whitney PW4000 is used on Airbus, and McDonald Douglas planes
too, maybe you better take the train.
Right...the loonytarian response...Boeing doesn't make the engines,
so it isn't responsible. What failed? Boeing didn't make
that engine, they come in assembled and installed as a FRU
Perhaps you should be blaming United airlines for sloppy
inspections. === The engine was made by Pratt and
Whitney, as are about 9% of the other Boeing 777s. The other
engines are made by Rolls Royce and GE, and are not known to have
any issues. Supposedly the FAA sactioned Pratt and Whitney a few
years back for not providing their engine inspectors with sufficient
training. The good news is that the plane landed OK and no one
on the ground was injured. There were some pretty big chunks that
fell on those houses. Many years ago (back in the early
80's) I was involved with the design of a vacuum deposition system
that deposited thin film strain gauges and thermocouples on P&W jet
engine turbine blades. It was for real time testing of turbine blade
designs. I visited the P&W facility in Florida after the system
was delivered and installed and was given a plant tour. One room had
a number of people seated at tables who were physically handling
turbine blades from bins at each table. My host explained that
they were all visually handicapped or blind and were using their
sensitized sense of feel to inspect the blades, feeling them for
inclusions or other irregularities in the blade surfaces.
Wow! How cool was that? Most of the linotype operators at the KC Star
when I worked there were deaf and grads of the School for the Deaf.
The clackity-clack of the machines didn't bother them. Good union
jobs, too, with top drawer bennies. Linotype? You are showing your
age now ;-) Our school paper (early 60s) was done in a Linotype shop
out New York Avenue near the DC line. It was quite an operation. We
switched printers a few months before I graduated, bringing in the
juniors and got a glossy offset tabloid+ size for less money from a
printer out around Clarksburg where one of those guys lived. It was a
nicer product but it didn't have that newspaper feel. The pictures were
actually almost photo quality and being offset, didn't cost anything
extra. The pictures in the old paper were molded plates on 3/4" wood. I
still have the plate for a cartoon I drew almost 60 years ago. I used
to do the layout and it was different when you can use all the pictures
you want. I think it made them lazy tho because they didn't need to
write as much to fill 8 (or 12 pages, what the last issue in 64 was). I
had copies of all the papers I worked on but they didn't make it in a
move. When I worked at The Star, we put out 13 editions a day, seven
for the morning KC Times, six for the afternoon-evening KC Star. They
were the same paper but with different nameplates, plus a Sunday roto
section with feature material. I worked on the morning paper, and was "A
Member of The Star's Staff." That was always a kick. -- * Lock up
Trump and his family of grifters. *

Yawn. Not cool. :-)

Typical newspaper person today. Show the bias.